[SendDocsPlox]

"The perpetrators of this scheme provided contracts that fraudulently described each transaction as a purchase of a portion of a merchant’s future revenues, with flexible payment amounts and open-ended terms. In reality, the predatory lenders collected payments at fixed daily amounts, which they debited directly from merchants’ bank accounts over short repayment terms, such as 60 or 90 days."

This is the real alarm bell ringing here

Get ready for daily logins for those ACH debits lol

[Chambo]

"The perpetrators of this scheme provided contracts that fraudulently described each transaction as a purchase of a portion of a merchant’s future revenues, with flexible payment amounts and open-ended terms. In reality, the predatory lenders collected payments at fixed daily amounts, which they debited directly from merchants’ bank accounts over short repayment terms, such as 60 or 90 days."

This is the real alarm bell ringing here

Get ready for daily logins for those ACH debits lol

You can still do dailies, but you will need to reconcile with the merchant constantly, and the dailies cannot go over a certain % of receipts.

But really, lockbox and the split funding will make a HUGE comeback

[Franklin]

You can still do dailies, but you will need to reconcile with the merchant constantly, and the dailies cannot go over a certain % of receipts.

But really, lockbox and the split funding will make a HUGE comeback

Lockboxes and split funding were such a pain in the neck. It adds more time to completing the deal, more coordination with more people now (sales and tech) and more selling and coercing to get the merchant to switch processors when necessary, (which was never a 100% sure thing even when justified), all of this leading to lost deals.


I think it'll be more efficient to setup some weekly reconciliation, with an automatic refund at the end of each week as needed.


There are additional ramifications the suit doesn't mention that could possibly come out during discovery and open an even bigger "can" for these companies, but I won't be adding any fuel to this fire.






www.UccRadar.com - Large sales volume merchants, filling out your application.

[closer129]

Lockboxes and split funding were such a pain in the neck. It adds more time to completing the deal, more coordination with more people now (sales and tech) and more selling and coercing to get the merchant to switch processors when necessary, (which was never a 100% sure thing even when justified), all of this leading to lost deals.


I think it'll be more efficient to setup some weekly reconciliation, with an automatic refund at the end of each week as needed.


There are additional ramifications the suit doesn't mention that could possibly come out during discovery and open an even bigger "can" for these companies, but I won't be adding any fuel to this fire.






www.UccRadar.com - Large sales volume merchants, filling out your application.

probably 20% of my companies book are cc splits via direct or a lockbox. It is not hard at all to set these up and sell the merchant. The issue is most brokers do not know how to sell and do not care about the merchant they just want to push either the easiest deal or most money or both and not have to wait a few extra days to get paid. If more brokers did the right thing they would sell more deals and have a bigger book of renewals because the merchant wont bounce a ton of payments on the set high ac payment.

[abfunders]

Lockboxes and split funding were such a pain in the neck. It adds more time to completing the deal, more coordination with more people now (sales and tech) and more selling and coercing to get the merchant to switch processors when necessary, (which was never a 100% sure thing even when justified), all of this leading to lost deals.


I think it'll be more efficient to setup some weekly reconciliation, with an automatic refund at the end of each week as needed.

Lockboxes are definitely harder to set up, which is why ACH same-day funding became popular. Then people started taking advantage of this and now we're in this mess. Franklin, come up with a system to do the remitting and sell it. Fundkite came up with a system, I don't think they're interested in selling it, but it's certainly the best of both worlds. Also, add an option for "ceiling", I don't think that Fundkite does that. It mirrors CC splits and Fundbox, but the only thing is that you need to convince the merchant to allow the Plaid link to their bank account to stay for the course of the advance. If a funder would be smart, they'd also allow for add-ons (like TMR and Quikstone) to separate themselves from the pack to give that extra reason to stay with them. (Also, because there's monitoring, keeps them on their honor not to stack....)

[closer129]

Lockboxes are definitely harder to set up, which is why ACH same-day funding became popular. Then people started taking advantage of this and now we're in this mess. Franklin, come up with a system to do the remitting and sell it. Fundkite came up with a system, I don't think they're interested in selling it, but it's certainly the best of both worlds. Also, add an option for "ceiling", I don't think that Fundkite does that. It mirrors CC splits and Fundbox, but the only thing is that you need to convince the merchant to allow the Plaid link to their bank account to stay for the course of the advance. If a funder would be smart, they'd also allow for add-ons (like TMR and Quikstone) to separate themselves from the pack to give that extra reason to stay with them. (Also, because there's monitoring, keeps them on their honor not to stack....)

Thank you for that little shout out.

Going into some ones bank every week and seeing what they deposited to see what the sales is not very cost efficient. You will need to hire more people to just handle that job and then the cost of the money will need to go up. If you go into the bank and the prior week was higher and you raise the payment for the next week but if the sales during the next week or lower it can cause the payment for the next week to bounce. When you take into consideration the merchants daily balances and their profit margins and do not go over a certain percentage of the gross there should never be an issue of the remit having to be changed week to week. When you are going out over 25% of the merchants gross and see that they keep more in the bank on a daily basis than than the payment then that is not a good thing and there will always be issues with the payments.

[Franklin]

Thank you for that little shout out.

Going into some ones bank every week and seeing what they deposited to see what the sales is not very cost efficient. You will need to hire more people to just handle that job and then the cost of the money will need to go up. If you go into the bank and the prior week was higher and you raise the payment for the next week but if the sales during the next week or lower it can cause the payment for the next week to bounce. When you take into consideration the merchants daily balances and their profit margins and do not go over a certain percentage of the gross there should never be an issue of the remit having to be changed week to week. When you are going out over 25% of the merchants gross and see that they keep more in the bank on a daily basis than than the payment then that is not a good thing and there will always be issues with the payments.

Well, if you're using a refund system, the daily debit will never change. Just the amount that goes back to the merchant each week, if an adjustment was needed because sales dropped.





www.UccRadar.com - Large sales volume merchants, filling out your application.

[mistamca]

Lockboxes are definitely harder to set up, which is why ACH same-day funding became popular. Then people started taking advantage of this and now we're in this mess. Franklin, come up with a system to do the remitting and sell it. Fundkite came up with a system, I don't think they're interested in selling it, but it's certainly the best of both worlds. Also, add an option for "ceiling", I don't think that Fundkite does that. It mirrors CC splits and Fundbox, but the only thing is that you need to convince the merchant to allow the Plaid link to their bank account to stay for the course of the advance. If a funder would be smart, they'd also allow for add-ons (like TMR and Quikstone) to separate themselves from the pack to give that extra reason to stay with them. (Also, because there's monitoring, keeps them on their honor not to stack....)

I've been playing around with this idea for a while. It's not that difficult to have a system to do the heavy lifting but the devil is in the details and categorizing revenue has always been a bit problematic and credit unions are just not fun